Brezhnev's Folly: the Building of BAM And

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Brezhnev's Folly: the Building of BAM And 1 Introduction The Project of the Century , the assessment of the Baikal-Amur Mainline Railway (BAM) and its effects on the Soviet Union trans- formedW radically. In , Leonid Brezhnev addressed the Seventeenth Kom- somol Congress: “The Baikal-Amur Railway will transform the cities and settlements of Siberia, the North, and the Far East into high-culture centers while exploiting the rich natural resources of those regions!”¹ By , how- ever, the Moscow News told a different story: “What is the railway like today? It is in a state of ruin and desolation. Rarely does a train whistle disturb the surrounding silence. The stations are deserted. The passenger terminals, beau- tiful structures built from individual designs that were chosen in competi- tions, are neglected. The settlements built by envoys from various republics of the former USSR have fallen into decay. Each year the number of resi- dents dwindles—they keep scattering in all directions.”² The chasm of social and political change that these assessments bracket proved more vast than even the four thousand kilometers of harsh Siberian terrain traversed by one of the most ambitious public works projects ever conceived. The BAM was so important to the entire leadership of the Soviet © 2009 University of Pittsburgh Press. All rights reserved. Union that it tirelessly poured massive resources into a project doomed to crumble almost immediately upon completion.³ The Soviet Union used the railway to bolster collective faith in the command-administrative system as well as to improve the economy. The personal influence of Brezhnev repre- sented a strong force in the push to popularize the project. In its heyday, BAM represented the quintessential Soviet big engineering project, as the nation’s scientists, journalists, academics, and propagandists extolled the railway’s virtue as the USSR’s first step toward realizing a utopian society. BAM was the last example of Soviet “gigantomania”. Like its many predecessors it shared a massive allocation of human and material resources, a highly inefficient uti- lization of them, and a general disregard for any impact on the environment. The project represented the government’s attempt to exploit the USSR’s vast natural resources for propagandistic and economic reasons.⁴ As one in a long progression of Soviet colossal schemes that the party used to herald the accomplishments of state socialism, BAM was the final expression of post- Stalin Prometheanism, in which the conquest of nature through technology was seen as a panacea for various political, social, and economic problems.⁵ Although the project achieved little in terms of tangible accomplishments, the propaganda effort created by the Soviet state to cast BAM in a favorable light was one of the most significant, if not the greatest, achievement of the eighteen-year Brezhnev period.⁶ The resources employed to portray BAM as an epic victory of humankind over nature, a forum for ethnic cooperation, and a catalyst for the economic development of the USSR’s eastern reaches equaled and occasionally surpassed those used to build the railway itself. In fact, the propaganda system created to promote BAM touched the lives of more Soviet citizens than its actual construction. Interviews with BAM par- ticipants stress the propagandistic nature of BAM rather than its concrete accomplishments. Interestingly, although never publicly conceived as such by the state, the railway served as a place where Soviet youth could express themselves with relative freedom. This situation was the product of a number of factors. One was that the project’s great distance from the centers of state power in the European part of the Soviet Union and Moscow in particular allowed the BAM labor population the space to voice a number of taboo ideas. They could engage in behaviors that were antithetical to official Soviet notions of civil obedience. These behaviors included, but were not limited to, expressions of national identity from a variety of non-Russian ethnic groups that resided / Introduction: The Project of the Century © 2009 University of Pittsburgh Press. All rights reserved. both inside and outside the Soviet Union, a voicing of environmentalist and ecological tendencies that in some cases exceeded the scope of what the state allowed, philosophies of women’s liberation and expressions of gender equal- ity, and even widespread participation in criminal activity ranging from petty theft to rape and murder. One of the most intriguing aspects of BAM is the stark contrast between the project’s public portrayal in official media outlets and the private impres- sions of the railway held by those who worked it. Among other things, this disparity reveals the regime’s fundamental lack of understanding of one of its most important constituencies—the next generation of Soviet youth, which the project was intended to motivate. Exploring the disparity between BAM propaganda and BAM reality deepens understanding of the social dynamics of the Brezhnev era and beyond. BAM was not simply a microcosm of the Soviet Union during this period; rather, it provided a venue in which be- haviors and attitudes that defined public and private discourse throughout the Brezhnevian USSR were magnified to a considerable degree. As such, the history of the Brezhnev years generally and BAM specifically cannot be defined solely as products of an era of stagnation (zastoi), as some Gorbachev- era, post-Soviet, and Western observers have characterized it.⁷ The BAM proj- ect illustrates a multiplicity of dynamic tendencies that shaped this critical period in Soviet history. After the Bolshevik Revolution of and subsequent Russian Civil War, the newly created Soviet Union maintained the imperial-era emphasis on rail- way construction and added a new push to mobilize the populace toward achieving a common goal of constructing socialism.⁸ A series of ambitious undertakings drew international attention to the Soviet Union’s program of rapid industrialization. This was particularly true in the case of Magnitogorsk, a steel-making complex that was built in the southern Ural mountains from the late s to the mid-s.⁹ Describing Magnitogorsk, American socialist and Magnitogorsk welder John Scott remarked that “in Russia . the world’s most gigantic social experiment is being made—amidst a galaxy of picturesque nationalities, wondrous scenery, splendid architecture, and exotic civilizations.”¹⁰ The construction of Magnitogorsk provided the Soviet Union with a steel-producing capacity that soon rivaled those of the United States and Western Europe. An integral part of the authorized propaganda campaign behind the Magnitogorsk and other contemporary efforts was the official apotheosis of Stalin himself, in which the mass media portrayed the Soviet Introduction: The Project of the Century / © 2009 University of Pittsburgh Press. All rights reserved. dictator as a modern-day Prometheus who successfully harnessed the power of nature for the good of all Soviet people.¹¹ During the Stalin years, such construction schemes as the Turkestano- Siberian Railway (commonly known as Turksib), the Moscow metro system, and the Belomor (White Sea) Canal in the northwestern part of the USSR closely integrated the country’s rail and water transport networks, albeit with substantial human and material costs that the Soviet government had no qualms in accepting.¹² Also during this period, the Dneprostroi dam and hydroelectric project brought flood control and cheap power while fostering a sense of inclusion among the thousands of young Soviet citizens who had tamed the wild Dnepr River with tractors and “socialist fire.”¹³ Each of these efforts helped to augment the Soviet Union’s industrial capacity and advance the careers of those Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) members who managed to avoid the Great Purges of the s and emerge as the coun- try’s new leadership.¹⁴ Two of these surviving managers were young CPSU members Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev. The Khrushchev-era Virgin Lands Campaign, which sent young Soviet men and women to introduce mechanized agriculture to the republic of Kazakhstan and other areas of the USSR, pointed to the state’s sustained in- terest in extending its control over nature but represented a distinctly different type of mass mobilization project than the costly and ultimately successful en- deavors of the Stalin era.¹⁵ Although Turksib had successfully connected the burning deserts of Soviet Central Asia and the frozen tundra of Siberia, the Virgin Lands Campaign ran into difficulties after initially delivering bumper harvests from the steppe soils of Kazakhstan. In the mid-s, the state pro- moted Sibaral, a plan to redirect the paths of several major Siberian rivers to control flooding and provide water for the parched cotton fields of Soviet Central Asia. A number of fantastic schemes were proposed, including the use of nuclear weapons to reverse the flow of the Irtysh and Ob rivers in an effort to bolster the flow of the Amu Darya River, which leads to the Aral Sea.¹⁶ The government’s primary motivation for such a radical plan as Sibaral was that it could provide an economic stimulus for the USSR’s impover- ished Central Asian republics. By the mid-s, however, a series of techni- cal glitches and environmental concerns doomed the project, and the state officially abandoned Sibaral during the late Gorbachev years.¹⁷ Long before BAM came to be known as the “Project of the Century,” ear- lier projects of Russia’s imperial and Soviet eras laid the groundwork for / Introduction: The Project of the Century © 2009 University of Pittsburgh Press. All rights reserved. Brezhnev’s folly. BAM’s legacy begins with the construction of the tsarist Trans-Siberian Railway in the late nineteenth century. Begun in , the orig- inal route of what would eventually become the ,-mile Trans-Siberian Railway was completed in during the Russo-Japanese War.¹⁸ With the outbreak of World War I in , the tsarist government relocated the rail- road around the southern shore of Lake Baikal beginning in as a replace- ment for the Trans-Siberian Railway’s original and vulnerable course through northwestern Manchuria.
Recommended publications
  • Sediment Transport to the Laptev Sea-Hydrology and Geochemistry of the Lena River
    Sediment transport to the Laptev Sea-hydrology and geochemistry of the Lena River V. RACHOLD, A. ALABYAN, H.-W. HUBBERTEN, V. N. KOROTAEV and A. A, ZAITSEV Rachold, V., Alabyan, A., Hubberten, H.-W., Korotaev, V. N. & Zaitsev, A. A. 1996: Sediment transport to the Laptev Sea-hydrology and geochemistry of the Lena River. Polar Research 15(2), 183-196. This study focuses on the fluvial sediment input to the Laptev Sea and concentrates on the hydrology of the Lena basin and the geochemistry of the suspended particulate material. The paper presents data on annual water discharge, sediment transport and seasonal variations of sediment transport. The data are based on daily measurements of hydrometeorological stations and additional analyses of the SPM concentrations carried out during expeditions from 1975 to 1981. Samples of the SPM collected during an expedition in 1994 were analysed for major, trace, and rare earth elements by ICP-OES and ICP-MS. Approximately 700 h3freshwater and 27 x lo6 tons of sediment per year are supplied to the Laptev Sea by Siberian rivers, mainly by the Lena River. Due to the climatic situation of the drainage area, almost the entire material is transported between June and September. However, only a minor part of the sediments transported by the Lena River enters the Laptev Sea shelf through the main channels of the delta, while the rest is dispersed within the network of the Lena Delta. Because the Lena River drains a large basin of 2.5 x lo6 km2,the chemical composition of the SPM shows a very uniform composition.
    [Show full text]
  • Detachment Instead of Confrontation: Post-European Russia in Search of Self-Sufficiency
    Detachment Instead of Confrontation: Post-European Russia in Search of Self-Sufficiency Alexei Miller, Fyodor Lukyanov The report was written by Alexei Miller, Professor at European University in St. Petersburg and Central European University in Budapest; Fyodor lukyAnov, Editor-in-Chief of the Russia in Global Affairs magazine and a Research Professor at the National Research University-Higher School of Economics. Alexei Miller, Fyodor Lukyanov Along with all the complexes of a superior nation, Russia has the great inferiority complex of a small country. Joseph Brodsky Less Than One, 1976 “Our eagle, the heritage of Byzantium, is a two-headed one. Of course, eagles with one head are strong and powerful as well, but if you cut off the head of our eagle which is turned to the East, you will not turn him into a one-headed eagle, you will only make him bleed.” Russian Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin, from the speech in the State Duma in support of the construction of the Amur Railway, 1908 This project originated in 2015 when intellectual interaction between Russia and the West was rapidly degrading to mutual accusations and verbal fights over “who is to blame” and “how much more Russia should suffer before it is ready to repent.” We sought to provide a forum for analysts and political practitioners from Russia, Europe, the United States, and China to con- duct a constructive dialogue and ultimately move from producing endless recriminations and claims to discussing the future of Russia’s role in international affairs. Naturally, this also meant discussing the future of the world as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • In March 1972 the Leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet
    MueRecognitionller in Return for Détente? Recognition in Return for Détente? Brezhnev, the EEC, and the Moscow Treaty with West Germany, 1970–1973 ✣ Wolfgang Mueller Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/jcws/article-pdf/13/4/79/697792/jcws_a_00167.pdf by guest on 24 September 2021 In March 1972 the leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), Leonid Brezhnev, unexpectedly suggested that the Soviet Union might be willing to recognize the European Economic Community (EEC). Until that point, the Soviet Union had refused to recognize the EEC and had regularly and vigorously attacked it as a “community of monopolists” and a stalking horse for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Brezhnev’s predecessor, Nikita Khrushchev, had conveyed similar signals re- garding possible recognition in 1962, but he never turned the idea into reality. In contrast, some ten years later, Brezhnev inspired the start of negotiations between the EEC and the Soviet bloc’s Council of Mutual Economic Assis- tance (CMEA). This article draws on Soviet archival documents as well as Western and Russian publications and memoirs to analyze the background, circumstances, and consequences of Brezhnev’s initiative. The article gives special attention to the following questions: What convinced Brezhnev and his colleagues in 1972 to change their hitherto uniformly negative assessment of the EEC? Was this change the result of a major policy reassessment or simply a byproduct of other considerations? How was the initiative linked with broader Soviet foreign policy goals? Why was it not ultimately successful? In answering these questions, the article traces the external and internal factors that inspired the Soviet initiative, including the EEC enlargement process, East-West détente, CMEA integra- tion, Ostpolitik, and Soviet and East European economic and political develop- ments.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Looking Back at Brezhnev
    russian history 41 (2014) 299-306 brill.com/ruhi Introduction Looking Back at Brezhnev Peter Rutland Wesleyan University [email protected] Victoria Smolkin-Rothrock Wesleyan University [email protected] In the West, the Soviet Union is most often viewed through the Cold War lens of capitalist triumph over socialist decline and failure. Rather than take seri- ously the communist challenge to capitalist modernity, the Soviet project is presented as a historical dead-end, a doomed experiment that collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions. The Soviet Union – the story goes – was ruled by a stultified bureaucracy under which citizens enjoyed limited per- sonal freedom and dissidents were ruthlessly persecuted. The attempt to build a centrally-planned economy on principles antithetical to the market led to colossal inefficiency and stagnant growth. Moscow’s competition with the United States for global hegemony brought the world to the brink of nuclear war and fueled bitter conflicts from Afghanistan to Angola. The system’s survival depended on stringent controls on communication with the outside world. Russians, of course, have a more complicated relationship to their own past. Even as the historical legacies of Lenin and Stalin, Khrushchev and Gorbachev, remain contentious, the Soviet Union of Leonid Brezhnev, who was General Secretary from 1964 to 1982, is often portrayed as something of a golden age.1 The papers gathered here were originally presented at a conference “What Was the Soviet Union? Looking back at the Brezhnev years,” held at Wesleyan University on 20–21 October 2011. 1 See Otto Boele, “Remembering Brezhnev in the New Millennium: Post-Soviet Nostalgia and Local Identity in the City of Novorossiisk,” The Soviet and Post-Soviet Review 38 (2011): 3–29, as well as the theme issue on the “long 1970s” in the Russian journal Neprikosnovennyi zapas 52 (2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Vision for the Northeast Asia Transportation Corridors
    Northeast Asia Economic Conference Organizing Committee Transportation Subcommittee Chairman KAYAHARA, Hideo Japan: Director General, the Japan Port and Harbor Association/ Counselor, ERINA Committee Members DAI, Xiyao PRC: Director, Tumen River Area Development Administration, the People’ s Government of Jilin Province WANG, Shengjin PRC: Dean, Northeast Asia Studies College of Jilin University TSENGEL, Tsegmidyn Mongolia: State Secretary, Ministry of Infrastructure SEMENIKHIN, Yaroslav RF: President, Far Eastern Marine Research, Design and Technology Institute (FEMRI) Byung-Min AHN ROK: Head, Northeast Asia Research Team, Korea Transportation Institute(KOTI) GOMBO, Tsogtsaikhan UN: Deputy Director, Tumen Secretariat, UNDP Secretariat ERINA (Ikuo MITSUHASHI, Senior Fellow, Kazumi KAWAMURA, Researcher, Research Division, Dmiriy L. Sergachev, Researcher, Research Division) Vision for the Northeast Asia Transportation Corridors Contents Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2 Nine Transportation Corridors in Northeast Asia.................................... 2 Chapter 3 Current Situation and Problems of the Nine Transportation Corridors in Northeast Asia ....................................................................................... 5 3.1 Taishet~Vanino Transportation Corridor 3.2 Siberian Land Bridge (SLB) Transportation Corridor 3.3 Suifenhe Transportation Corridor 3.4 Tumen River Transportation Corridor 3.5 Dalian Transportation Corridor
    [Show full text]
  • Detente Or Razryadka? the Kissinger-Dobrynin Telephone Transcripts and Relaxing American-Soviet Tensions, 1969-1977
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont CGU Theses & Dissertations CGU Student Scholarship 2013 Detente or Razryadka? The Kissinger-Dobrynin Telephone Transcripts and Relaxing American- Soviet Tensions, 1969-1977. Daniel S. Stackhouse Jr. Claremont Graduate University Recommended Citation Stackhouse, Daniel S. Jr.. (2013). Detente or Razryadka? The Kissinger-Dobrynin Telephone Transcripts and Relaxing American-Soviet Tensions, 1969-1977.. CGU Theses & Dissertations, 86. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgu_etd/86. doi: 10.5642/cguetd/86 This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the CGU Student Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in CGU Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Détente or Razryadka? The Kissinger-Dobrynin Telephone Transcripts and Relaxing American-Soviet Tensions, 1969-1977 by Daniel S. Stackhouse, Jr. A final project submitted to the Faculty of Claremont Graduate University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History. Claremont Graduate University 2013 Copyright Daniel S. Stackhouse, Jr., 2013 All rights reserved. APPROVAL OF THE REVIEW COMMITTEE This dissertation has been duly read, reviewed, and critiqued by the Committee listed below, which hereby approves the manuscript of Daniel S. Stackhouse, Jr. as fulfilling the scope and quality requirements for meriting the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Janet Farrell Brodie, Chair Claremont Graduate University Professor of History William Jones Claremont Graduate University Professor of History Joshua Goode Claremont Graduate University Professor of History ABSTRACT Détente or Razryadka? The Kissinger-Dobrynin Telephone Transcripts and Relaxing American-Soviet Tensions, 1969-1977 by Daniel S.
    [Show full text]
  • War Memory Under the Leonid Brezhnev Regime 1965-1974
    1 No One is Forgotten, Nothing is Forgotten: War Memory Under the Leonid Brezhnev Regime 1965-1974 By Yevgeniy Zilberman Adviser: Professor David S. Foglesong An Honors Thesis Submitted To The History Department of Rutgers University School of Arts and Sciences New Brunswick, NJ April, 2012 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements Pg. 3 Introduction Pg. 5 1964-1967: Building the Cult Pg. 18 a) Forming the Narrative: Building the Plot and Effacing the Details Pg. 21 b) Consecrating the War: Ritual, Monument and Speech Pg. 24 c) Iconography at Work: Soviet War Poster Pg. 34 d) Digitizing the War: On the Cinema Front Pg. 44 1968-1970: Fascism Revived and the Battle for Peace Pg. 53 a) This Changes Everything: Czechoslovakia and its Significance Pg. 55 b) Anti-Fascism: Revanchism and Fear Pg. 59 c) Reviving Peace: The Peace Cult Pg. 71 1970-1974: Realizing Peace Pg. 83 a) Rehabilitating Germany Pg. 85 b) Cinema: Germany and the Second World War on the Film Screen Pg. 88 c) Developing Ostpolitik: War memory and the Foundations for Peace Pg. 95 d) Embracing Peace Pg. 102 Conclusion: Believing the War Cult Pg. 108 Bibliography Pg. 112 3 Acknowledgements Perhaps as a testament to my naivety, when I embarked upon my journey toward writing an honors thesis, I envisioned a leisurely and idyllic trek toward my objective. Instead, I found myself on a road mired with multiple peaks and valleys. The obstacles and impediments were plentiful and my limitations were numerous. Looking back now upon the path I traveled, I realize that I could not have accomplished anything without the assistance of a choice collection of individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject of the Russian Federation)
    How to use the Atlas The Atlas has two map sections The Main Section shows the location of Russia’s intact forest landscapes. The Thematic Section shows their tree species composition in two different ways. The legend is placed at the beginning of each set of maps. If you are looking for an area near a town or village Go to the Index on page 153 and find the alphabetical list of settlements by English name. The Cyrillic name is also given along with the map page number and coordinates (latitude and longitude) where it can be found. Capitals of regions and districts (raiony) are listed along with many other settlements, but only in the vicinity of intact forest landscapes. The reader should not expect to see a city like Moscow listed. Villages that are insufficiently known or very small are not listed and appear on the map only as nameless dots. If you are looking for an administrative region Go to the Index on page 185 and find the list of administrative regions. The numbers refer to the map on the inside back cover. Having found the region on this map, the reader will know which index map to use to search further. If you are looking for the big picture Go to the overview map on page 35. This map shows all of Russia’s Intact Forest Landscapes, along with the borders and Roman numerals of the five index maps. If you are looking for a certain part of Russia Find the appropriate index map. These show the borders of the detailed maps for different parts of the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Mikhail Gorbachev and His Role in the Peaceful Solution of the Cold War
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Dissertations and Theses City College of New York 2011 Mikhail Gorbachev and His Role in the Peaceful Solution of the Cold War Natalia Zemtsova CUNY City College How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cc_etds_theses/49 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] Mikhail Gorbachev and His Role in the Peaceful Solution of the Cold War Natalia Zemtsova May 2011 Master’s Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of International Affairs at the City College of New York Advisor: Jean Krasno ABSTRACT The role of a political leader has always been important for understanding both domestic and world politics. The most significant historical events are usually associated in our minds with the images of the people who were directly involved and who were in charge of the most crucial decisions at that particular moment in time. Thus, analyzing the American Civil War, we always mention the great role and the achievements of Abraham Lincoln as the president of the United States. We cannot forget about the actions of such charismatic leaders as Adolf Hitler, Josef Stalin, Winston Churchill, and Franklin D. Roosevelt when we think about the brutal events and the outcome of the World War II. Or, for example, the Cuban Missile Crisis and its peaceful solution went down in history highlighting roles of John F.
    [Show full text]
  • The Giant Sukhoi Log Gold Deposit. Siberia
    RussiaaGeology ' Geoloeila - ond Geophtsics i Geofrzita Vol. 47, No. 3, pp. 3 15-341, 2N6 UDC553.,U1(571.53) THE GIANT SUKHOI LOG GOLD DEPOSIT.SIBERIA B.L. Woodl and NP. Popov* StarTechnology SystemsN.L, Moscow, Russi4 PO Box 6325 , Univenity of NSfi Sy&rey, NSW 1466, Australio + Lenzolato Open foint Stock Compoty, Bodaibo, Russia The Sukhoi Log gold deposit is cenhally located in the L,€nagoldfield region, approximately 850 lcn IrlE fmm the city of Irkutsk, aad is hoshd in Upper Proterozoic marine sandstone, carbonaceous slate and phyuita, metemorphos€d to low greensddst faci€s in an ouflying part of the major Akitkan Foldbelt. Ihe disseminated pyritic tabular orebody has no outcrop, is defined solely by assay grades and is located in the axial zone of a large, near-isoclinal, reclining anticline" Highest ore grades occur in pyritic black shale b€ds, especially where they cross the axial zone and include two elongate high€r grade ('1-9 ppn gold) cylindrical zones, term€d ore pillars, along the gently plunging anticlinal crest The anticline is exposed E-W over a length of 3 km and plunges at approximately 10' degrees NW. The uial plane and orebody dip 15" N, and the tatter is open to depth beyond 4fi) m. Three phases of syn- and post-metamorphic rnesoscopicfolding develop€d eharacteristic structures. The first two (Fr and F2) are congruent with the anticline and localized quarE-pyrite-gold veinlet mineralization in Fr axial plane deavages(St), in narro% spaced axial zonesof small non-penehative folds (Fz), in irregular ilisseminated zonesin shale,and in small inegular clusters (stringers) of q[arb-csrbonatc veins.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic and Foreign Problems of the Brezhnev Era CHAPTER 5 Domestic and Foreign Problems of the Brezhnev Era
    Chapter 5: Domestic and foreign problems of the Brezhnev era CHAPTER 5 Domestic and foreign problems of the Brezhnev era This chapter analyses Leonid Brezhnev’s rule of the USSR until his death in 1982. The extent to which this was an era of political, economic and social stagnation is fully explored. Soviet foreign policy in the 1970s is also discussed, in particular the reasons for the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan and its consequences. You need to consider the following questions throughout this chapter: + What were the key features of the USSR’s politics, society and economy under Brezhnev? + Was Brezhnev’s leadership to blame for Soviet stagnation from 1964 to 1982? + What challenges did Soviet foreign policy face in the Brezhnev era? + To what extent were the USSR’s aims achieved in Afghanistan? + Why did the USSR invade Afghanistan? + How serious were the socio-economic and political problems confronting the USSR by the time of Brezhnev’s death? 1 Politics, economy and society under Brezhnev Key question: What were the key features of the USSR’s politics, society and economy under Brezhnev? By 1964, Nikita Khrushchev, the First Secretary of the Communist Party of KEY TERM the Soviet Union (CPSU), was viewed by senior party members as increasingly unable to exercise the necessary leadership and stability Presidium Dominant, required for the USSR to uphold its world position. policy-making body within the CPSU formed by the Khrushchev was removed from party leadership following a plot by Council of Ministers, members of the Presidium, in which Leonid Brezhnev played a leading part.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Search for a Greater Eurasia
    KENNAN CABLE No. 40 l February 2019 President Atambayev (Kyrgyzstan), President Nazarbayev (Kazakhstan), President Putin (Russia), President Lukashenko (Belarus), and President Sargsyan (Armenia) after a meeting of the Eurasian Economic Union in Moscow in 2014. Photograph: Reuters Russia’s Search for a Greater Eurasia: Origins, Promises, and Prospects Seçkin Köstem Vladimir Putin announced the Russian government’s Russia’s geo-economic projects are always linked to desire for a greater Eurasian partnership at the St. its status in international politics, and the search for Petersburg Economic Forum in June 2016. In the a Greater Eurasia demonstrates that for the Kremlin, opening speech, Putin proposed “considering the foreign economic strategy and international identity prospects for more extensive Eurasian partnership are inherently linked. While Russian leadership is well involving the Eurasian Economic Union,” in which aware of the shifts in the global economy, it is also countries such as China, Pakistan, Iran, and India would entrapped by its great power nationalism in designing also be included.1 Since then, Putin has consistently and implementing its strategy. With its grand name, promoted the project in his addresses to the Federal the Greater Eurasian Partnership is no exception; the Assembly, in meetings with foreign leaders, at Kremlin acknowledges the strategic importance of Asia subsequent St. Petersburg Economic Forums, and at but does not have the economic and political means to the Eastern Economic Forums held in Vladivostok. achieve its goals. KENNAN CABLE No. 40 l February 2019 Origins and Promises of Greater and Russia, as well as by Belarus and the Silk Road Economic Belt project.”3 The report put emphasis on Eurasian Partnership the modernizing role of Eurasian integration for the Russia initially aimed to integrate into Europe as Russian economy.
    [Show full text]